From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 19 03:13:47 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: FreeBSD-ports@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C66016A41B for ; Mon, 19 Nov 2007 03:13:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from edwin@mavetju.org) Received: from mail5out.barnet.com.au (mail5.barnet.com.au [202.83.178.78]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A04F13C4D1 for ; Mon, 19 Nov 2007 03:13:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from edwin@mavetju.org) Received: by mail5out.barnet.com.au (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 315152219D5C; Mon, 19 Nov 2007 14:13:37 +1100 (EST) X-Viruscan-Id: <4740FF600000C9100E6A45@BarNet> Received: from mail5auth.barnet.com.au (mail5.barnet.com.au [202.83.178.78]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mail5auth.barnet.com.au", Issuer "*.barnet.com.au" (verified OK)) by mail5.barnet.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D76A21B12F7; Mon, 19 Nov 2007 14:13:36 +1100 (EST) Received: from k7.mavetju (k7.mavetju.org [10.251.1.18]) by mail5auth.barnet.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56C012219D46; Mon, 19 Nov 2007 14:13:36 +1100 (EST) Received: by k7.mavetju (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 15DF71A3; Mon, 19 Nov 2007 14:13:36 +1100 (EST) Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 14:13:36 +1100 From: Edwin Groothuis To: Chuck Robey Message-ID: <20071119031336.GA73804@k7.mavetju> References: <4740E430.9050901@chuckr.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4740E430.9050901@chuckr.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Cc: FreeBSD-ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ports modifying system setups X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 03:13:47 -0000 On Sun, Nov 18, 2007 at 08:17:36PM -0500, Chuck Robey wrote: > activate the port, and if so, the port would add a line of the form > 'portname_enable="YES"', and this would make your new port operate. > Well, it seems from what I see of my new system, that this is no longer > the case. I could understand (and approve of) ports not being allowed > to modify any /etc/contents, but howcome ports can't use this rather > obvious workaround? I don't recall this behaviour at all, I think you're confused with the messages which ports print at the end of the install-phase which say "Add 'foo_enable="YES"'" to your /etc/rc.conf to enable this port. Edwin -- Edwin Groothuis | Personal website: http://www.mavetju.org edwin@mavetju.org | Weblog: http://www.mavetju.org/weblog/